Islesboro Island Trust unveils alternative dredge plan. Plus Media reaction to Report

PENOBSCOT BAY. Plans for expansion dredging of Searsport Harbor came under fresh fire today, as a bay area land trust and other opponents of the project renewed their call for the US Army Corps of Engineers and Maine Department of Transportation to perform an Environmental Impact Study on the controversial project before further action is taken. See media coverage at end of release

Islesboro Island Trust today released a report by prominent consulting firm Dawson and Associates that notes that the agencies have not considered 

less damaging alternatives, nor considered the impact to bay fisheries of the release of large quantitities of methylmercury into Penobscot Bay water column.

The Dawson & Associates Report  APPRAISAL OF SEARSPORT DEEPENING PROJECT (pdf) suggests maintenance dredging the entry to Searsport Harbor only to mintenance standard to 35 feet rather than 45, and instead  deepening the layover berths next to the piers to 45 feet. The report says

97% of projected shipping benefits identified by the Corps in their proposal would be achieved using this alternative, the report says, "but would require substantially less dredging than the Corps’ proposal."

Ron Huber, executive director of Friends of Penobscot Bay lauded the report.
"Our state and federal governments need to take the concerns of Penobscot Bay area citizens seriously." Huber said. "This project could radically change the lives of people who fish Penobscot Bay. And those who beachcomb, swim and sail it. "

FOPB's concerns are the same as other dredge critics: the mega-dredge could bring mercury, then methylmercury resuspension, reduce primary production by bay seaweeds and microalgae by turning the water nearly opaque for up to a year, & could stimulate increased coastal industrial growth in the upper Penobscot Bay estuary.

"With the river dams coming down, this estuary needs more protection, not less" he said. "As more and more seafood species come up Penobscot Bay and down Penobscot River, this estuary, as the transition crossroad for them, must be kept ecologically sound."

For more information about the Dawson  & Associates report contact Steve Miller, Islesboro Island Trust 207-734-6907 iitsmill@gmail.com

MEDIA COVERAGE

Legislators officials want further study into Searsport dredging Fox 22 Bangor

Group wants Searsport Dredging Put on Hold  WABI

 Group Unveils Possible Alternative to Searsport Dredge plan. WLBZ

Possible alternative to Searsport dredge plan advanced. WCSH 6

Group advances alternative Searsport Dredging Plan MPBN

Land Trust Promotes Alternative to Searsport Harbor Dredging Bangor Daily News

http://bangordailynews.com/2014/06/12/news/midcoast/land-trust-promotes-alternative-to-searsport-harbor-dredging/

Islesboro Islands Trust retains prominent security expert to review DCP gas tank plan

From the Islesboro Islands Trust August 14, 2012

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY EXPERTS TO REVIEW SEARSPORT LPG TERMINAL

 Islesboro Islands Trust retains Richard A. Clarke and consulting firm Good Harbor to conduct impartial All Hazards Risk Assessment of LPG marine import terminal proposed for Searsport, Maine.

ISLESBORO, MAINE (Aug. 14, 2012) – Today, the Islesboro Islands Trust (“IIT”) announced the retention of internationally renowned security expert Richard A. Clarke with the consulting firm Good Harbor, to conduct an independent All Hazards Risk Assessment of the 22.7 million gallon liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) marine import and storage facility proposed for Mack Point in Searsport, Maine.

IIT Executive Director Stephen Miller said, “The people of the Penobscot Bay region have repeatedly asked the developer and the permitting agencies to hire an independent expert to conduct an unbiased analysis of the safety and security risks of siting the largest liquefied petroleum gas import terminal on the East Coast at the head of Penobscot Bay – but these requests have, so far, been ignored.”

Steve Hinchman, counsel for IIT, a conservation land trust, and Thanks But No Tank, a concerned citizens group in the upper Penobscot Bay, noted further, “The potential economic, social, environmental and human costs of a serious accident – whether onboard ship, at the terminal, or from LPG tanker trucks on Route 1 or Route 3 – are too great to proceed any further until we understand the risks involved.”

To fill the gap, IIT turned to Richard A. Clarke, counter-terrorism advisor to three Presidents of the United States, and his firm, Good Harbor, because they have the experience, qualifications and capacity to provide the people of Midcoast Maine with an objective, unbiased review of the critical security questions associated with the proposed LPG terminal.

The Good Harbor All Hazards Risk Assessment will involve identification of the potential intentional, natural and accidental threats that are inherent to a gas import and storage facility of this scale, whether the gas is LPG or LNG, and will examine the vulnerabilities associated with the 24-acre project site and surroundings, as well as potential weaknesses in the facility’s configuration and design.

To evaluate the region’s ability to safely manage this risk, Good Harbor will compare the proposed Pen Bay project against LPG terminals elsewhere (there are two similar facilities on the East Coast) to assess the community’s ability to cope with an emergency, including fire and emergency response personnel, training, and equipment; public notice and evacuation plans; medical and hospital assets; and US Coast Guard and commercial tug capabilities to respond to accidents on the water.

As part of the Assessment, a blast and heat effects analysis will map out areas that may be impacted in the event of an accidental or intentional event. The analysis will be based on the worst case and “worse likely” events, as identified in the All Hazards assessment.

The sheer size of the proposed LPG terminal – and the inherent risk of transporting large volumes of explosive gasses – warrants this level of careful and independent review,” Miller added.

To fill this critical information void, the Islesboro Islands Trust, with the generous support of many concerned residents, has undertaken the burden to obtain an objective, neutral assessment of the safety and security risks and threats posed by this proposed facility and the tanker traffic – on land and sea – that it will generate.  

-- end --

FMI: Stephen Miller, IIT Executive Director 207-734-6907 (office) 207-542-5780 (cell) 

Legal Wrangling Continues over Searsport LPG

From: Island Institute's "Working Waterfront" newspaper. August 2012 edition

Legal Wrangling Continues over Searsport LPG
By Douglas Rooks.

Review of a proposed $40 million, 22.7 million gallon liquefied propane gas (LPG) storage tank is now in the hands of the Searsport Planning Board. But opponents and skeptics of the project still wonder if their concerns will ever be fully addressed.

“There’s a tremendous number of moving parts, and the responses we’ve seen to date tend to raise more questions than they answer," said Steve Miller, executive director of the Islesboro Island Trust——whose organization has not yet taken a position on the project.

Attorney Steve Hinchman represents a local citizens group, Thanks But No Tank, which has concluded that potential harm from the project outweighs any benefits, and appealed issuance of two state permits in Kennebec County Superior Court.
Among the legal issues raised by the group are noise levels, visual and scenic impacts, and the lack of a lighting plan from the developers, DCP Midstream Partners of Denver, Colo.

A brief from the State Attorney General’s oflice says the Department of Environmental Protection acted correctly in issuing the permits. And DEP spokeswoman Samantha DePoy-Warren, said, “Our review of this project . . . was a thorough and thoughtful one and was completely in keeping with the high standards of review that are within our jurisdiction under the Natural Resources Protection Act and the Site Location of Development Act."

DEP did impose several conditions on the permit, including a requirement that DCP Midstream pay $305,835 into a state conservation fund as mitigation for disturbing two acres of wetlands and rerouting a stream.

DePoy—Warren also noted that, although there were 30 written comments, no one requested a public hearing, which could have brought the matter before the Board of Environmental Protection and triggered a more extensive review.

Hinchman conceded that point, but said that BEP hearing requests were only possible for 20 days after DCP Midstream’s application was filed, in April 2011, and that “people in town were just starting to become aware of the size and scope of this project."

DEP issued the permits in September, while the Army Corps of Engi- neers signed off in April of this year.

The project still needs a Maine Fuel Board permit, and will need a federal Environmental Protection Agency permit before operating, but at this point, town review could be the last major step before construction. No Tank’s appeal of DEP’s permit decisions is now before Superior Court Iudge Nancy Mills, who could issue a ruling at any time, since the judge has not requested oral arguments.

But Hinchman is still not convinced that state and federal reviews will adequately consider the impacts. There is, for instance, the issue of public safety. “There are only two LPG storage plants on the East Coast of this magnitude,” he said — in Tampa, Fla., and Norfolk, Va. “And both of them are in heavily industrialized areas remote from homes and retail businesses?

Hinchman wonders how a volunteer fire department like Searsport’s would be able to cope with a major spill or fire. He noted that a spill at a nearby fuel depot required dispatch of a foam truck from Portland.

The tank would be built on 23.6 acres at the northeast corner of the port site, relatively close to Route 1. The Angler restaurant would be a near abutter, something that led its owner to join the No Tank group. A mile—long pipeline will connect the harbor site to the storage tank, which will be 138 feet high, almost three times the height of any existing tank in Searsport. A town height restriction was increased from 50 to 150 feet at a lightly attended town meeting in March 2011, by a vote of 79-66.

Nor do some local residents believe the state has appropriately gauged the impact of truck traffic; initially, all LPG would be moved by trailer, although rail line access is available.

One comment that doesn’t sit well with local residents came from Dave Allen, a DOT traffic engineer, who said at a recent public meeting, “Route 1 has tens of thousands of vehicles going down it every day. No one is even going to notice these trucks." The terminal is expected to operate year-round, 24 hours a day.

For Steve Miller, it is coastal navigational issues that are particularly daunting. In its review of the project, the U.S. Coast Guard recommended that no other vessels be in the shipping lane while LPG tankers are approaching the pier at Searsport. “Managing traffic during the busy summer months could take a lot more sophisticated system than anything that’s in place there now,” he said.

Miller is also disappointed and surprised that the Army Corps of Engineers didn’t require an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the project, opting instead for a more abbreviated environmental assessment. “That could still change," he said. “Searsport could still request an ElS."

Miller noted that, in an application for a now-moribund liquefied natural gas plant on Cobscook Bay, the applicant’s EIS said in its alternatives analy- sis that Searsport would be unsuitable for LNG—and, he added, the National Fire Marshal’s office considers LPG to be more hazardous than LNG.

Arch Gillies, an Isleboro selectman, says it’s significant that at least seven neighboring municipalities have written to the Searsport Planning Board raising concerns. “There’s a real sense that this project is a lot bigger than anyone realized when the application was filed last year," he said. “I think that’s starting to sink in.”
But whether that realization will lead to more scrutiny is anyone’s guess. “In the filings, it’s diflicult to see the need for something this large,” Miller said.

“They say there was a propane shortage in Maine in 2007, but that was really more about transportation bottlenecks than supply. It’s hard to argue that all this new infrastructure is really necessary."

Former Maine Times and Kennebec Journal editor Douglas Rocks has been covering Maine issues for 25 years. He lives in West Gardiner.

Why threaten midcoast Maine for just 12 jobs?

Why threaten midcoast Maine for just 12 jobs?                                      
By Kim Tucker, Special to the Bangor Daily News


Why should we jeopardize our safety, our security, our environment, our quality of life, every existing job and the marketability and value of every property in midcoast Maine so that we can possibly add 12 permanent jobs in Searsport? Especially when these 12 jobs will likely go to people from out of state?

The very purpose of the proposed Mack Point liquefied petroleum gas tank and import terminal — to import more liquefied petroleum from foreign countries for use as a fuel to heat Maine homes and businesses — is contrary to the security interests of Maine and the United States in two ways.

First, it creates an attractive target for a terrorist attack without any discernible security plan provided by the developer, DCP Midstream — meaning they either are not providing adequate security or they are imposing the burden of that security on taxpayers without advising them of that hidden cost.

Second, this facility proposes to make Mainers more dependent on foreign sources for our heating needs — DCP’s goal is contrary to our interests as a state and as a nation to become more secure through energy independence. Since less than 6 percent of Maine homes and businesses currently rely on propane for heat, why do we need a facility to import foreign propane — liquefied petroleum gas — from unstable regions and countries, and make more Mainers dependent on foreign sources to heat their homes and businesses?

On March 10, Searsport residents will have an opportunity to approve a moratorium and slow this process down. If approved, the moratorium will allow Searsport the time to ask the proper questions about the costs and benefits of this facility — questions that should have been asked by state regulators before permits were issued to allow such a fundamental change for Searsport and all of Penobscot Bay.

The 9/11 tragedy should have taught us that the risk of terrorist attacks must be a consideration when any facility such as the one proposed for Mack Point is proposed. A recent congressional report on siting liquefied natural gas, or LNG, import terminals, similar to the LPG facility DCP proposes in Searsport, detailed the significant terrorist risk posed to public safety and security by such facilities and highlighted terrorism as a necessary consideration in making decisions about where to place such facilities.

That report noted that LNG tankers and land-based facilities could be vulnerable to terrorism. Tankers might be physically attacked in a variety of ways to release their cargo — or commandeered for use as weapons against coastal targets. LNG terminal facilities might also be physically attacked with explosives or through other means. Some LNG facilities may also be indirectly disrupted by cyber-attacks or attacks on regional electricity grids and communications networks that could in turn affect dependent LNG control and safety systems.

Incomprehensibly, despite the heightened terrorist threats we currently face from Iran and other sources, Congress has not vested any federal agency with specific jurisdiction over evaluating the security implications in siting LPG import terminals of the sort DCP is proposing to put in Searsport. Such determinations have been left to state regulators.

Unfortunately, Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Patricia Aho, a former lobbyist for the Petroleum Institute, did not see fit to include any consideration of the public safety and security threats posed by this facility when she did her cursory evaluation of this project and rubber stamped it for approval. Now, it is up to Searsport residents to demand the time to make a proper assessment of the real costs of the limited benefits DCP is offering.

Please, speak up and tell Searsport residents that we need them to pass the moratorium and take the time to do a proper study of the real costs and benefits of this proposal and tell Augusta that we do not want to be the next man-made disaster in this country.
Feb 24, 2012

Kim Ervin Tucker of Islesboro is a lawyer admitted to practice law in Maine, Florida and the District of Columbia. Since May 10, 2010, she has assisted the Deepwater Horizon Legal Advisory Group, appointed by former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and the Florida attorney general and is currently assisting Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood in his efforts to get BP to honor its promise to pay all legitimate claims to those damaged as a result of the spill.

Penobscot Bay islands join mainland towns opposing DCP Midstream supertank plan for Searsport

Upper Penobscot Bay is aflame, as town after town rises in opposition to would-be LPG tank operatorDCP Midstream, an appendage of Conoco Phillips and other Big Gas heavyweights that seeks to build the east coast’s biggest Liquified Petroleum Gas tank and dock in tiny but uncooperative Searsport, Maine. (Cont'd below picture.)

Long Cove lowtide clamflats.DCP LPG tank would flatten & pave forest on lower half of picture. US Rt 1 on left

The resistance began with Searsport, whose citizens halted the gas giant’s fast track slide toward rubberstamp approval on municipal and federal levels. They then, banding together as Thanks But No Tank! launched a lawsuit against the state permit  that Maine DEP had granted to DCP Midstream on October 24, 2011.  

But Searsport no longer stands alone against the Denver-based behemoth. The towns of Islesboro, North Haven and Stockton Springs have also risen, with Belfast soon to chime in.  See recent news story  See Isleboro fact sheet on DCP plan

The growing consensus among these and other upper Penobscot Bay towns is that the 23 million gallon supertank, and its associated flare tower and accessory facilities, would thoroughly and unacceptably dominate, day and night, the economically-precious regional landscape of a dozen coastal towns dependent on scenic tourism, as well as permanently increase the homeland security risk level of the area.

These three towns have made it absolutely clear to the ultimate decisionmaker - the US Army Corps of Engineers - that nothing less than a full Environmental Impact Study of DCP Midstream’s supertank plan and its effects on the region will suffice, before that agency makes its decision.  (The Army Corps is taking comments until February 29th.)

The upper Penobscot bay towns’ concerns include

* Safety and security implications of having a  huge vulnerable liquefied petroleum tank hulking over scenic US Route 1,

*The gargantuan size of DCP’s proposed 23 million gallon liquified petroleum tank, completely out of scale and character with the region including the existing petroleum tank farms.  

*  The effect on tourism and quality of life of the tank farm’s deforestation of the Mack Point coastal forest, its chronic stench, its intermittently roaring flare tower & powerful night lights, its constantly running auxiliary generators,  and the continuous dull roar of propane tanker trucks passing in and out of their towns, as they feed 24/7 in and out of the facility.

  

DCP Midstream has responded to local opposition with a heavyhanded statewide public relations campaign, pitting town against town. The company also sought to divide Searsport’s populace between the town’s two big economic engines: tourism and port. 

But these two business sectors have a lengthy tacit agreement in Searsport not to impact each other’s ability to create wealth, so the gas giant’s efforts appear unpersuasive. If anything they may have brought Searsporters closer together in suspicion of the company’s motives.

  

Indeed DCP Midstream’s latest newest PR gambit suggests a certain level of panic on the company’s part.   An anonymous harassment campaign attacking key Searsport opponents of the company’s tank plan has arisen.  Nasty insinuations,  personal slurs, race-baiting and worse have been launched against area citizens. While the perpetrator of these libelous productions remains concealed in internet anonymity, it is widely believed from the writer’s grammar and style that a DCP public relations staffer, or  other hireling from “Away”, is the real person behind the fictitious “Jake Prodder” and other anonymous attackers. Area residents plan to consult with Colorado’s human rights and corporate accountability bureaus to see if they can have the offending personages identified and dealt with.

With the feeling growing around upper Penobscot Bay that DCP Midstream is trying to suppress citizen and municipal opposition to its plan, the company’s prospects seem to be dimming. As one critic succinctly put it:

“If that is the playbook this company is using to woo Mainers, they might as well head home to Colorado right now.”

For more information:    

* Thanks But No Tank!

* Islesboro Islands Trust

* Penobscot Bay Watch

* DCP Midstream

News: North Haven & Islesboro seek impact analysis for proposed Searsport propane terminal

From Herald Gazette

Islands seek impact analysis for proposed Searsport propane terminal

By Shlomit Auciello | Feb 17, 2012

Share

Photo by: Tanya MitchellSearsport resident Tom Gocze, at microphone, addresses selectmen Jan. 17 about his concerns regarding the size and scope of the proposal from DCP Midstream to construct a 22.7-million-gallon liquefied petroleum gas storage tank at Mack Point. In the foreground is a scale model of the 137-foot-tall tank, as well as a nearby Irving tank and Angler's Restaurant, a model that Gocze built. DCP Midstream representatives dispute the accuracy of the model.

The Islesboro and North Haven boards of selectmen have voted unanimously to ask the Army Corps of Engineers for “a fair and thorough” environmental impact study of a proposal — by Colorado-based DCP Midstream — to construct a 22.7-million-gallon liquefied petroleum gas storage tank at Mack Point before issuing a decision on pending permits, a Feb. 16 press release said. The release was issued by the Islesboro Board of Selectmen with the assistance of the Islesboro Islands Trust.

At the Feb. 14 regular meeting of the North Haven Board of Selectmen, all five selectmen voted in favor of sending a letter expressing concern about the effect the LPG terminal may have on the island's commercial fishermen and other island businesses to Jay Clement at the Army Corps of Engineers office in Manchester.

North Haven resident and Maine Chapter Sierra Club chairwoman Becky Bartovics suggested selectmen send the letter before the period for public comment closes on Feb. 28. The Army Corps of Engineers is the lead regulatory agency on the project.

The Islesboro Board of Selectmen met Feb. 15 and agreed to send a similar letter to Clement. Board chairwoman Susan Schnur said that she was especially concerned about safety issues. The letter the Islesboro board agreed to send said, in part, “The possibility that the proposed LPG terminal and tank will diminish the scenic value, recreational opportunities and economic viability of our marine and second-home-related businesses, which this proposal clearly represents, is troubling.”

The letter said further, “A full EIS would provide more, better and sorely needed information about possible alternatives to the current large-scale proposal, about the economic impact on current businesses in the region, about whether this particular facility is needed, and about environmental effects of the LPG terminal, especially on valuable scenic resources. A public hearing on the proposal is also essential.”

North Haven Town Administrator Joseph Stone on Feb 16 said that a fact sheet provided by Islesboro Islands Trust, “was significantly persuasive that it convinced the North Haven Board of Selectmen to send [a letter] of their own.”

He said the boards are concerned about the scale of the project, its “obvious environmental impact” and the fact that the tank's contents must be kept at minus 40 degrees.

“There will be regular flare-offs,” he said. “If it ever blew up most of the Midcoast would disappear with it.”

“The absence of an EIS seems astonishing, given the scale of the project and how relatively benign projects, such as as wind turbines, undergo exhaustive review,” said Stone. “We have to go through an environmental review just to rebuild our 120-year-old bridge because it's going to take up an additional 4,000-square-feet of mudflats.”

Island response mirrors mainland concerns

Opponents of the proposal have accused the company of paying residents to influence the results of the upcoming moratorium vote and presenting “fraudulent” information. Another accusation, made at a Jan. 26 meeting in Searsport, was based on the presentation of enlarged, digitally enhanced images showing what the tank might look like from various points around town. Resident Peter Taber took issue with their accuracy, particularly with one that appeared late last year in a full-page advertisement in the Bangor Daily News that showed the proposed tank at the same width as the tanks that already exist at Mack Point. The project plans, Taber said, show the proposed tank would be nearly twice as wide as the existing tanks on the waterfront. The LPG facility would be built alongside existing port operations on the Searsport waterfront.

More than 200 people packed into Union Hall in Searsport Jan. 26 to hear a presentation from representatives of DCP Midstream.

Searsport selectman Doug Norman raised questions, at that board's Feb. 7 meeting, about whether jobs related to the project would benefit local workers.

"I asked a question about jobs and I don't think I got an adequate answer," said Norman. "They only said how many jobs would be available... When I asked what their definition of community employment is, they did not answer."

At the Jan. 26 informational meeting, DCP Midstream officials said it is preferable to hire local people to fill 12 to 15 permanent jobs and an estimated 100 construction positions, but Norman said he wanted to know if applicants from Bangor or Portland would be considered just as local as a Searsport resident.

Norman said DCP Midstream Chief Operating Officer Chris Lewis told him employment laws bar the company from discriminating against any job applicants based on race, gender, or in this case, town of residence.

"I'm bringing this up because a lot of people support this because they think they can get a job, and that might be the case, I certainly hope they do," said Norman. "But there are no guarantees."

A job fair for the project has been scheduled for Thursday, Feb. 29, 4-8 p.m., at Union Hall on the second floor of the Searsport Town Office building.

Residents have also expressed concern over the ability of the town's volunteer fire department and emergency responders to adequately protect the public in the event of a large-scale emergency.

Anna Kessler, Astrig Tanguay and Betty Schopmeyer have been conducting a review of the town's emergency plan.

Kessler said the plan has limited information about hazards and toxic materials that are already existent in the town's port operations and being transported along Route 1. The plan, she said, does little to inform residents about the existing on-site materials, the risks involved or what the public can do to prepare for an emergency involving hazardous materials.

In addition, Kessler said, the town has no detailed warning system for alerting residents of an emergency or pending evacuation. She referred to a fire that broke out at one of the tanks at the Irving Oil facility last summer, and how despite the response of seven towns and additional equipment that was brought to the scene, it took several hours to put out the fire.

Town Manager James Gillway reminded the public that town Emergency Management Director Almon "Bud" Rivers is in the process of reviewing the town's emergency plan.

Comments in regard to the proposed DCP Mainstream tank project may be mailed to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Maine Project Office at 675 Western Ave #3, Manchester, ME 04351. Those wishing to comment on the project may also contact Project Manager Jay Clement at 623-8367 or visit the website at nae.usace.army.mil.

The Gazette reporter Shlomit Auciello can be reached at 207-236-8511 or by email at sauciello@villagesoup.com. VillagesSoup Journal reporter Tanya Mitchell contributed to this story.

Sears Island. Press Herald editorial gets it completely wrong.

In their ill-informed editorial  Obstacles removed from Sears Island Development, the Maine Sunday Telegram made the call that Judge Jeffrey Hjelm's decision on the three Sears Island cases, "upholds a compromise that could give eastern Maine a cargo port."

Had the editors troubled to actually read the judge's opinion, they would have discovered that Judge Hjelm merely ruled that because the state has failed to find a company willing to exploit the island, there was no actual threatened threat at this time to the island and its critical groundfish nursery shoal. 

Hjelm specifically said his decision did not find fault with the issues raised by the three nature-defenders; only that since there's no port plan, there's no potential harm to be ruled about. Hjelm waited nearly two years to rule on the cases, waiting to see if the state might find a port wannabee interested in building on the island. MDOT didn't.

So, with time passing and no threatening moves by Maine DOT, Justice Hjelm had to dismiss the cases - without prejudice.   This means that as soon as soon as the state does move to bring a proposal forward, the challengers who raised  this case will be right back before the court. Stay tuned!